1.
Effect of Lactobacillusplantarum containing probiotics on blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Lewis-Mikhael, AM, Davoodvandi, A, Jafarnejad, S
Pharmacological research. 2020;:104663
Abstract
Previous studies have recommended that probiotics may have blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects. However, they examined all probiotic strains (multi/single probiotics) simultaneously. In respect to strain specificity properties of probiotic, the aim of the present study was to systematically investigate the role of Lactobacillus plantarum as an anti-hypertensive agent by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were used from inception until October 2018 to identify eligible trials. We used random-effects model as the preferable method to assess the combined treatment effect. We further conducted sensitivity analysis and stratified analysis. Seven studies with 653 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) with the random effects model showed a significant effects of Lactobacillus plantarum supplementation on improvement of SBP with no statistically significant heterogeneity (WMD: -1.58 mmHg, 95 % CI: -3.05 to 0.11) (heterogeneity P = 0.14; I² = 36 %). The overall effect in the DBP showed significant pooled estimates (WMD: -0.92 mmHg, 95 % CI: -1.49 to -0.35) with a complete homogeneity between the studies (heterogeneity P = 0.46; I² = 0 %). The findings of the present meta-analysis study support the use of Lactobacillus plantarum supplementation for lowering systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The clinical significance of blood pressure-lowering effect of Lactobacillus Plantarum supplementation is not considerable; however, given the overarching benefits evident and concurrent lack of specific side effects, further trials are warranted to clarify the effects of Lactobacillus Plantarum probiotics particularly for hypertensive patients.
2.
Improving type 2 diabetes mellitus glycaemic control through lifestyle modification implementing diet intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
García-Molina, L, Lewis-Mikhael, AM, Riquelme-Gallego, B, Cano-Ibáñez, N, Oliveras-López, MJ, Bueno-Cavanillas, A
European journal of nutrition. 2020;(4):1313-1328
Abstract
PURPOSE Type 2 diabetes mellitus represents a significant health problem. Many studies have reported that intensive nutritional intervention by itself or in addition to medications is the best method to improve glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, in clinical practice, dietary education is not implemented as an integral part in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to analyse the scientific evidence concerning the role of nutritional intervention in the glycaemic control of type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS We searched Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases from inception till May 2019 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that include dietary interventions in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESULTS A total of 28 studies were included. Our results demonstrated that lifestyle interventions significantly lowered glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels compared to the usual care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, overall weighted mean difference, WMD = - 0.51 (- 0.67, - 0.35). Strategies combining individualized and group-based activities were the most effective, WMD = - 0.95 (- 1.24, - 0.66). Most of stratified analyses did not totally resolve heterogeneity, but improvement in HbA1c levels has been consistently observed. CONCLUSIONS The available evidence from RCTs shows that lifestyle intervention is more effective than the standard care regarding the glycaemic control of type 2 diabetic patients, particularly when there is a weight loss. It is time to translate this evidence to the primary health care practice. The protocol of the present systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, registration number CRD42018090469.
3.
Pregnancy outcomes in women taking probiotics or prebiotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Jarde, A, Lewis-Mikhael, AM, Moayyedi, P, Stearns, JC, Collins, SM, Beyene, J, McDonald, SD
BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018;18(1):14
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
It has been suggested that probiotics might help prevent premature birth, but two previous systematic reviews found possible increases in risk. The objective of this meta-analysis was to perform an up-to-date review of the risk of premature birth and other pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women taking probiotics or prebiotics. The authors pooled data from 27 studies, one using prebiotics and the rest probiotics. Taking probiotics or prebiotics during pregnancy did not change the risk of premature birth, or other pregnancy outcomes. The authors concluded that more studies are required to assess the safety and effects of taking probiotics and prebiotics during pregnancy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics are living microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit. It has been speculated that probiotics might help prevent preterm birth, but in two previous systematic reviews possible major increases in this risk have been suggested. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of preterm birth and other adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women taking probiotics, prebiotics or synbiotics. METHODS We searched six electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science's Core collection and BIOSIS Preview) up to September 2016 and contacted authors for additional data. We included randomized controlled trials in which women with a singleton pregnancy received a probiotic, prebiotic or synbiotic intervention. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a piloted form and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the results. RESULTS We identified 2574 publications, screened 1449 non-duplicate titles and abstracts and read 160 full text articles. The 49 publications that met our inclusion criteria represented 27 studies. No study used synbiotics, one used prebiotics and the rest used probiotics. Being randomized to take probiotics during pregnancy neither increased nor decreased the risk of preterm birth < 34 weeks (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.29-3.64, I2 0%, 1017 women in 5 studies), preterm birth < 37 weeks (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71-1.63, I2 0%, 2484 women in 11 studies), or most of our secondary outcomes, including gestational diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS We found no evidence that taking probiotics or prebiotics during pregnancy either increases or decreases the risk of preterm birth or other infant and maternal adverse pregnancy outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION We prospectively published the protocol for this study in the PROSPERO database ( CRD42016048129 ).